Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
1. Did the district court err in concluding the parties were not partners?
2. Did the district court err in concluding appellees did not breach their duties as joint venturers?

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I. Whether the Trial Court Correctly Decided that No Partnership Existed Among the Parties Because Their Activity Did Not Involve a Series of Acts Directed Toward an End.
A. Whether the trial court applied a correct statement of law when it applied the law that the business relationship necessary for a partnership requires a series of acts directed toward an end.
B. Whether the trial court's factual finding that the parties' activity in investing in the initial Horn Leases was limited to that occurrence is supported by the evidence.
II. Whether the Trial Court Correctly Decided that the Defendants Did Not Breach Fiduciary Duties in Obtaining the Horn Top Leases Because that Activity Was Outside the Scope of the Assumed Joint Venture.
A. Whether the trial court applied a correct statement of law when it applied the law that the fiduciary duties of a joint venture are limited to the scope of the joint venture.
B. Whether the trial court's factual finding that the scope of the assumed joint venture was limited to selling the initial Horn Leases during their term is supported by the evidence.